Saturday, April 28, 2012

The Essential Quality of Consciousness

.
Consciousness is the conservator of conceptualization. Consciousness does not function as a physically measurable force. Rather, it functions as a conceptual facilitator and conservator. Without Conscious Will --- either active or stored, present or potential, manifesting or preset --- there would be no Information that could be stored.  At its most essential, Consciousness is that meta function which facilitates meaningfulness by borrowing from nothingness. Meaningfulness is the qualitative counterpart to that which Consciousness conserves and expresses, via quantitative significations. All that is measurably signified --- original and unfolding --- consists with bubbles manifesting forth out of nothingness, facilitated by Consciousness.
.
Conceptualization avails freedom to Consciousness; conservation avails parameter-limiting feedback to Consciousness. Without conservation (limits and laws), there would be no freedom. There is no freedom except under law. Feedback avails the signification of appreciable choices. The feedback by which Consciousness functions consists via a mathematical (digital-based) dance of apprehension (fore-boding) and appreciation (after-boding). The mathematical average of the dance as a whole always conserves and balances out to zero (quantitative nothingness). Conceptualization of math, borrowed from zero, yields conceptualization of fluxing forms, which yields conceptualization of space-time. Reconciliation back to zero yields conceptualization of matter-energy. The dance of conceptual conservation proceeds in digital like feedback between parts (particular fluxing perspectives of consciousness) and the whole (holistically synchronizing perspective of consciousness).
.
That which is conceptualized as good is that which is adjudged helpful towards that which is sought to be reconciled. That which is conceptualized as neutral is that which is adjudged of vanishing relevance towards that which is sought. That which is conceptualized as bad is that which is adjudged counterproductive to that which is sought. Except in respect of a digital dance of feedback between perspectives of Consciousness, concepts of good, neutral, and bad would have little or no significance in themselves.

*******

The method of scientific empiricism is the only way to learn the quantitative formulas that delimit the parameters of the human biosphere. That system of conservation is the system within which conscious will conceptualizes.  However, the method of scientific empiricism is not suited to apprehend that to which conscious will should guide its conceptualizations insofar as there remain degrees of freedom to so guide.  There is a feedback relationship between that which is conserved and that which is conceptualized.  Conceptualization affects the apparent reality of the quantitatively testable.  Of course, the capacity of a single perspective of consciousness to so affect the conservational system is much more diluted than the sum of the capacity of all perspectives, or of the presently synchronizing or pre-willed and pre-set capacity of the holistic perspective.  Even so, the qualitative aspect of participating conscious will is a prime reality, which is clear to experience and enlightened intuition, even though, by definition, it is not itself subject to quantitative proof.
.

Thursday, April 26, 2012

Free Thinking Soon To Be Outlawed

Incompetents cannot be forced to be free. Moreover, persons who are not independently competent are needed for drudge work. Competent, producing, creative, middle-class republicans need to allow those who want to perform and to supervise drudge work to do so, while somehow retaining time, resources, and opportunity to be free to create. In Huxley’s Brave New World, there was a balance among classes, so that members of each class were kept satisfied with their situations. Somewhat similarly, the American Constitution sought to establish and preserve a republic by providing for checks and balances among various institutions of law and governance. However, the founders did not adequately foresee or provide for the day when the elites who run international corporations would acquire so much lopsided control over all institutions of mass finance, indoctrination into depravity (media and academia), and governance (international crony buying and selling of political influence). This lopsided and depraved state of affairs is now such that the producing and creating middle class is being milked, bilked, abused, and despised from all sides --- even as the borders of the country are being erased by deliberate neglect, under false cover of free trade with Marxists and Muslims. An independent, republican nation cannot be sustained when its middle class backbone is broken and its borders are despised.
.
Did not a similar state of depravity ruin the Roman republic and replace it with a despotic empire, ever more inclined to slavery and repression, ever less standing for anything that could adequately inspire defense against the disintegrating vices invited? Thereafter, by ever more repression and slavery, the Roman empire survived a long time. When it fell, a long period of even greater darkness descended. During that time, a malignant form of religious tyranny spread forth from the Middle East. The Renaissance did not begin to revitalize human dignity until tyranny from the East pushed genius to seek refuge in the West, and pushed the West to rise and stand. Thereafter, only when pushed to extremis did the West finally rise again, to stand for spreading human dignity and freedom, i.e., a flowering of free thinkers. Now, that flowering is being retracted, as oligarchs fund faux elites and experts, to trick and wrest to themselves all significant influence and control. The middle class is again being reduced to serf irrelevance and depravity, to mouth only elite catechisms (if they know what’s good for their careers). This will not sustain an expanding economy, nor expanding creativity, nor human decency or liberty. This is prelude to retrenchment to the subhuman.
.
The only way to avoid retrenchment is to revitalize political representation of a middle class of free thinkers. The only way to do that is to right the balance of power, by creating institutions that can check against the international corporate cronyism that is based out of Marxist and Muslim nations. That is the danger the founders failed adequately to check against, and that is the most virulent danger to human decency and liberty today. Yet, no important political party addresses such danger. Why? That’s easy. Both parties are, in main, directly or indirectly, funded by corrupt international crony corporatists. Except in bread and circuses, the middle class remains unorganized, unfunded, and unrepresented.
.
The lower class tends not to know what to do with itself, absent a taskmaster, while the upper class desires to be served. Neither is fond of any independent middle class, which tends to shame both the lower and the upper class. The upper class of inherited wealth is particularly shamed because its members know, in themselves, that there is not a great deal in them that is worth admiring. They don't tend to be creators or producers of great arts or inventions. Rather, they tend only to be buyers and sellers. The lower class is shamed because it's constantly reminded of its deficiencies and perpetual dependence. The lower and upper classes share an interest to hold the middle class in political servitude. The lower class cannot otherwise provide for itself, and the upper class cannot otherwise defend and enforce its leisure and rule. Dinos and Rinos align as Ainos, while middle class conservors of human dignity and freedom remain politically unorganized, unfunded, and unrepresented.
.
Means are being institutionalized to enforce such position in perpetuity. The trend is to a NWO, which will be like a rigid, hierarchical ant pile. The face of humanity will be replaced by a large headed ant. Unless an independent-minded middle class can somehow organize, leverage funding, and sustain viable political representation, the American Republic will be sold out to an empire of hierarchical serfdom, i.e., an Orwellian boot on the face of humanity — forever. Tattooed with a cynically smiling face.
.
Obama-the-Dino must be sent packing. Romney, however, must be closely watched. There is no “mission accomplished” for Conservatives merely by electing a Republican. Indeed, the need to establish a Conservative Political Party will become even more vital. Otherwise, a NWO will be set in concrete upon humanity with nary a whimper. If Obama woke us up, the danger is that Romney will put us back to sleep. The difference between a stagnant antpile and a human race worthy of interest of God and for exploring the cosmos is in the establishment and preservation of a class of free thinkers.
.

Sunday, April 22, 2012

Borrowing From Zero --- Causation, Correlation and Signification

.
ARBITRARINESS OF CAUSE AND EFFECT:  Does that which is effect and that which is cause depend on perspective, context, and purpose?  Insofar as unconscious "forces," do any such "things" really abide in themselves, apart from consciousness?  How can we empirically know whether chronology is always conserved by natural law versus renormalized by meta (non-empirical)-consciousness?  Does effect always follow cause, or can cause follow effect?  Does some character of the cosmos synchronize to make each decision even before each particularly conscious body apprehends that it has made a decision?  What is the character of the flux in feedback between apprehensions (fore-bodings) and appreciations (after-bodings)?  When are after-bodings fore-bodings, and when are fore-bodings after-bodings?  When can that which causes a rationaliztion be reasonably considered as having alreay rationalized the rationalization?  How is feedback between the Holism and its Parts synchronized?  Does the perspective of the Whole borrow against the Sum of its parts, and vice versa, does the Sum of the perspectives borrow against the Whole?  When, how, and why may a cause refocus itself as an effect?
.
BORROWING FROM ZERO:  Consciousness is that which can signify by borrowing from zero.  Regardless of what we measure or how carefully we measure, every "thing" that we can measure owes a conservational debt to zero. That is, our physical universe bubbled out from nothingness, and it will collapse back into nothingness. The "things" we measure and quantify are sequential mirages, such that every attempt to complete a measure necessarily recedes. If there abides any eternal or lasting entity or purpose, it abides in respect of meta properties and feedback that we, in our communicative significations, cannot quantify, but only indirectly experience, intuit, and empathize about. The only truth for us is that we can experience choosing, and we can tinker with how to pursue that which we choose, but we will never fully grasp any "real thing." However, as we make and change our choices, we can apprehend tactics for pursuing them, and such tactics will yield varying aspects of success (or truth value, or "truthiness"). The only "thing" that remains (everywhere and for all time and sequence) constant in its signification is change. The only non-trivial truth is that our experiences of conscious identity are derivative of an immeasurably entailed Source, with which we may or may not enjoy (or believe to enjoy) a meta-intuitive and empathetic relationship. In respect of that, we can choose to pursue a decent civilization of human liberty, or we can lose ourselves in pursuing no encompassing purpose apart from drug and hormone induced highs, derivative of hallucinations of "things" (and wars to mine or steal them).
.
SPIRITUAL EMPATHY: Spiritual empathy abides with caring, deceit, and wonder, and it is signified to be expressed in quantifiables. Spiritual empathy is the source of quantifiable communications (significations), not the byproduct. One exists more authentically by conceptualizing how expressions of empathy may be signified among potentially unlimited quantifiables, than by seeking somehow to confine or banish spirituality as a mere delusion. Science should better enhance the expressive signification of spiritual empathy, than try to prove or zero out spiritual empathy, either as entity or non-entity. In expressing oneself, one either conceptualizes that spiritual empathy abides, or one does not. The only “evidence” of spiritual empathy is non-empirical, non-scientifically testable. The evidence is in the living and experiencing. Quantifiables have nothing to do with proving such a pure qualitative. That said, those who resolve to live as if spiritual empathy were a non-entity are not reasonably expected to stand for much beyond the narrow perimeter of their self interests. Indeed, they will tend to believe there is not really any such a property as unselfishness (projective identification beyond delusions of matter).
.
SPIRITUAL FEEDBACK: The way the holism produces and guides seemingly particular perspectives has to do with how immaterial feedback is conducted between the signifying holistic perspective and the sensing particularistic perspectives. Every aspect that is signified is, at some level, sensed, and every aspect that is sensed is, at some level, signified. However, a particular perspective does not have capacity simultaneously to sense and signify the same interpreted aspect. Rather, there is a break in the simultaneity that avails feedback, hence chronological communication. That which unfolds is in respect of interfunctioning between sensing and signifying. It is not “caused” merely by what we sense to be unconscious signification of “mass.”
.
CAUSATION: Scientists and Spiritualists alike seek to understand causation. CAUSATION can be considered under many perspectives, contexts, and purposes. It can be considered under many headings, such as the following, which are not mutually exclusive, nor do I claim to know whether they are exhaustive:
1) Forces (weak, strong, radiating, gravitational);
2) Determinants (directed, random, chosen, evolving, guided, natural, artificial);
3) Transformants (sharing, exchanging, adding, losing, mutating, blueprinting);
4) Fields (multi-dimensional, 3-D waves, 2-D strings, 1-D points, wave-particle fluxes and collapses);
5) Particles (zero-conserving, virtual-borrowing, space-occupying, mass-carrying, charged neutral and polarized, paired and single, reactive or transformative, information carrying, size measuring, dark, bosons, ultimate, God particles);
6) Space-time occupancy (thinginess, massiness, hardness, exclusiveness, additiveness, space-distortion capacity, time-sequence-borrowing capacity);
7) Inertia (directional momentum, acceleration);
8) Densities (weight, massiness, reactiveness, inertness, temperature, vibration);
9) Detectibility (integrity, size, speed, direction, duration, alternating convertibility, testability, observability);
10) Direction (singular, repulsion, attraction, pushing, pulling, gluing, charged, polarized, angular, spin, orbit, intensity, amplitude, frequency, alternating);
11) Measurable Completeness (coherence, consistency, continuosity, digital discreteness, paradoxical, ambiguous, overlapping across logical categories, defying set restricted logical classification, trivalent defying of bivalent rule of the excluded middle);
12) Relations (essential and paradoxical thing in itself, ultimate particle, bonded, paired, annihilated, asymmetrical, directional, simultaneous, sequential, virtual, borrowed, catalytic, back feeding, transformational, fluxing, translatable, representative, signalizing, communicative, conservational yet unlimited, creative yet magical);
13) Explanatory Value (morally qualitative, empirically quantitative, sequential, predicting, controlling, replicating, statistically reliable, causal, associative, epiphenomenal, byproduct, delusional, conceptual, self authenticating, magical);
14) Information representing and storing capacity (picture defining and transmitting capacity, quantitative measurability, empirical confirmability, modeling and mapping capacity, logical consistency);
15) Re-Normativeness of Sequentiality (adjustability to relative standard based on point of view, context, and focus of purpose, resistence to creative re-conceptualization, preclusion of preservation of quantitative-based knowledge of travel back and forth in time, chronological protection mechanism, inter-changing virtuality of cause and effect);
16) Potentiality (mathematical, digital, sequential, conservational, quantitatively balanced to zero yet infinite, finite yet unbounded, unitary yet changing, fluxing yet vibrational, identical yet particular, qualitatively purposeful yet eternally unsatisfied, honest yet deceiving, ephemeral yet normatively measurable, timeless yet chronological, logical yet metaphysical — we know not what it is, but we know that it is not limited in its potential to that which it presently presents);
17) Intuitability (knowledge, belief, doubt, empirical confirmability, intuitive self fulfillment, truth value for reconciling non-quantitative qualitatives in respect of pursuits of conscious fulfillment);
18) Purposefulness (moral, good, evil, neutral, competitive, cooperative, empathetic, caring, connived);
19) Identity (iteration, polarity, projectibility, quality, holonic relativity);
20) Significativeness (amenability to modeling for measuring, however incomplete);
21) Holonic (synchronization between and among perspectives of the whole and of the parts).
.
SIGNIFICATION --- CONCEPTUAL COMMUNICATION AND BUILDING ON BACKS OF FAIRIES: Naming of aspects of particles sometimes seems similar to priests naming of aspects of God. As if naming or conceptualizing can somehow box God in, or magically constitute some real attribute or name-in-itself for whatever may constitute the Ephemeral Essence. We name particles as if we could hope to categorize and control the entire zoo of potential experience. As if our naming, conceptualizing, conjuring, measuring, and tinkering could participate in the unfolding creation and expression of some kind of meta-essential reality-in-itself. Might it thus be? Certainly, naming is useful. It helps us conceive and tinker. But it does not define, confine, or exclusively exhaust the entire quantifiability of all that is potentially signifiable. Nor will we ever succeed in categorizing and collecting a complete and entire set of mutually exclusive and exhaustive particles or concepts by which we could imagine of make up quantifiable reality. We cannot reasonably hope for that kind of scientific advancement. Yet, we can enhance significations that help us tinker and produce astonishing technological marvels. That is an aspect of the freedom that is expressed, through the feedback effect of our perspectives of Will dancing with God’s freedom of will. All that we experience and propose is derivative of the cloud or essential essence of God's unfolding facilitation of a dance of Will. All of conscious Identity is dependent on a same synchronizing cloud, an Ephemeral Essence, in respect of which are derived all measurable and quantitative aspects (significations) of causes, troubles, pains, pursuits, deceits, empathies, insights, and intuitions.
.
IMMATERIALITY: We do not sense any thing as it really is, in itself, for there is no way for a mortal to directly, empirically, or measurably sense a thing-in-itself. Instead, we apprehend and experience sensations of relations: the observed relation; the unconscious context of observation; the conscious participation in the observation. The quality of our participations and apprehensions feed back, to relate to the quality of synchronizing apprehensions of the Holism. Thus, there is constant, continuous, digital feedback and signification among relations in consciousness --- from and between the perspective of the part and the perspective of the holism.
.
SOURCE: The Source of such feedback is the source of consciousness, perhaps even of consciousness itself. What if our bodies and apprehensions are tricked out significations of their fluxes? Of which, beyond our bodies, we also are a part? What if “they” (previous evolutions of conscious beings from other planets) have already evolved to superior state, to garden their empathies and creative interests through us, as vicarious significations? What if our roles and duties are to function, in part, as avatars, to experience and feel, so that they also can, through us, signify? Once Beings of Consciousness harness the exponentially explosive potentiality of imaginative consciousness, they may have little reason to preserve museums or archeological records, or worlds of their evolution, from relatively fast ravages of inter-stellar expressions of force and fluxing causation. Once they “transcend,” why be surprised of the blasting away of any archeological record? After all, a record is not a thing-in-itself.
.
THE NON-REDUCTIVENESS OF THINGS: Somehow, depending on one’s perspective, context, and purpose, an Ephemeral Essence presents to apprehensions — as having properties, faces, and masks for appearing to be: Expanding or collapsing, rolling out or in, stretching or compressing, blinking ir or out, projecting or drawing, pushing or pulling, attracting or repulsing, changing or catalyzing, transforming or conserving, escaping or synchronizing, creating or annihilating, iterating or absorbing, spinning or orbiting, breaking or fluxing, dividing or reconciling, counting or scaling, vibrating or vanishing, mapping or modeling, apprehending or appreciating, valuing or pricing, explaining or unifying.
.
Only in respect of such presentations of properties is one is availed significations that can be scaled and measured, until such scalings result in transformations or phase shifts, which then can only be reasonably related along different, not necessarily coordinate, scales. The more precisely detailed one pursues to make one’s measure, the more the limits of one’s standard recede into fuzzy uncertainty, the more craftily the Ephemeral Essence facilitates alternative standards for measuring presentations. And so on. Thus, our sensations for experiencing and measuring manipulations of presentations is discretely finite, continuously unbounded, and not unitarily reductionist.
.
Under all such faces and masks, that which itself is fluxing and presenting significations to our apprehensions remains of the same essence, but is identifiable in its fluxing sameness only in qualitative respect, not quantitative. The operations by which we measure to stretch, compress, divide, glue, change, charge, polarize, spin, vibrate, transform, represent, etc., are performed in respect of how significations present to our conscious apprehension. That is, we differentially measure significations and signs of an Ephemeral Essence, which in itself we cannot measure, but only experience, armed only with our consciousness of identity, sensation, intuition, and empathy. We apprehend the Essence’s significations, we know our consciousness, we intuit ongoing participation, and, in respect thereof, we derive our moral purposefulness as we pursue our meaningful fulfillment.
.
CORRELATION --- Crossing the Fog:
Of the foggy apprehension of possibilities and the conscious appreciation of manifestations:  All other factors remaining proportionately equal, consider single-dimensional analysis of such “all other factors.” Ask: In what respect may such a mental project ever reasonably, precisely, or practically be undertaken? Suppose a person were — in any single way or along any single dimension — to alter his relationship with his contextual frame of reference (or space-time orientation), as by: altering his (or his avatar's, or his proxy's, or his thing-being-tested's) relative proximity, direction, speed, acceleration, angular momentum, orbital radius, vibration, focus of attention, screening of noise, or language or logarithm of deciphering. With each alteration of his point of view, would not his entire frame of reference also be affected? Still, he may find it practical, for many tinkering pursuits, to assume that all factors apart from his own orientation remain proportionately constant or continuous. However, such would not be the case. His change in point of view would affect his entire frame of reference, however subtly. The greater the individual change, the greater the multi-dimensional flux in his frame of reference. Eventually, the noise and fuzz of the multi-dimensional flux will overpower his capacity to maintain a sequentially proportional or logarithmic correlation between his perspective and his context. He will find himself in a paradoxical or foggy land of infinite possibilities of quantum fuzz or cognitive dissonance.

He may relieve such fog and fuzz either by reducing or increasing the direction or rate of his alteration from the original state with which the sustenance of his identity has bonded. However, he will not be able to disperse or clear the fog that separates the multi-dimensional transition. Nor will he be able to ensure the eternal life or body of his physical avatar. Death (identity transcendence) is his ultimate fog of transition. No single-dimensional-based technology will enable him to preserve a clearly proportional or logarithmic correlation across all alterations in his path between all perspectives and contexts. He will not be able to explicate, predict, or control the physical expression of the world in respect of any grand, reconciling, precisely-measuring model, map, or theory. Not in any single dimension of space, space-time, gravity, mass, direction, angular momentum, evolution from chaos, recordation of memory, entanglement of information, presetting of dominoes, competition among free beings, nor bonding to avatar. Rather, the transitioning and unfolding of that which presents from the communication and functioning that is signified across multiple dimensions is byproduct of a meta dance of feedback (of unfolding apprehension and appreciation) ... between an holistic source of conscious will and its variously particular perspectives.  Moreover, every perspective of consciousness participates in the feedback dance of apprehension and appreciation, in respect of which is signified all that is made manifest.
Respect for that is the basis for meaning, purposeful tinkering, empathy, and civilized morality. God presently feeds back, in respect of such significations as God presently has apprehensions of and appreciations for.

Saturday, April 21, 2012

Good and Evil Will -- preset versus active

.
PRESET WILL:  It seems doubtless that an Ephemeral Essence places many significations on preset autopilot, perhaps via logarithmic controls of either hard or random determination. Those math-based determinants ("laws of nature") that we share in common derivation from the Singular Holism may be conceptualized as exemplars of preset Will. They are what avail the illusion of substance, the massiness of matter, the solidity of things, the measurability of transfers of energy, the quantitative conservation of substantive transformations, the putting of flesh on signs. However, even such presets are subject to phase shifts, should the Holism adjudge a need, and such phase shifts themselves may be subject to presets.
.
CONSERVATIONAL FEEDBACK:  Even so, may the Ephemeral Essence remain involved and interested in some respects, to be influenced by present feedback, to alter its interests and guidance accordingly, as in a conservational dance with perspectives of interest? In respect of any such qualitative influence or feedback from the Holism with unfolding particular Perspectives, there would be no way, quantitatively, to measurably confirm, replicate, or predict such interest. Apart from intuitive sense of something like holistic empathy, astonishing coincidence, or uncanny deja vu, there would be no empirical way to prove the bodily involvement of a non-bodily entity.
.
GOD INTERESTS:  Such a perspective of Will, as an interesting human being may experience, may entail God dancing with one, in present time, or God having preset the dance, beyond present time. Of our less interesting conduct, God may "take note" only by storing Information with a recording algorithm. Of our more interesting conduct, God may presently actuate feedback that is astonishing, yet not physically verifiable as having entailed God's active interest. In any event, all that is consciously sensed is derivative of interfunctioning of perspectives of Will --- sometimes preset, sometimes presently actuated.
.
PURE WILL:  We do not enjoy pure freedom to act irrespective of preset or presently set significations of God. Nor is it quite "our" Will that is free. Our mortal forms only avail avatars and perspectives for giving expression to the sensing, apprehending, appreciating, and evaluating of feedback of Will in respect of unfolding significations. While every perspective plays a necessary role in the conservational expression of the music of the cosmos, many are often "behind the camera" of God's active interest, yet all are eventually absorbed into the holistic prespective. Thus, there is meaning, merit, and purpose in the unfolding of the dance of Will --- both from holistic and from particular perspective, both in presets and in active dancing.  The intuitive indicator of an active dancer is expressed in the quality of being receptive to the dance, not in the empirical measure of any quantitative, nor in the precise monitoring of any physical form or robotic meant to establish artificial intelligence. 
.
EVIL:  Why is evil allowed? Evil is allowed because of a necessary rift between cooperation and competition, between the fluxing whole and its conservationally dependent parts. Paths to evil become easier as the dance between individual and holistic perspectives breaks down, so that mutual caring among perspectives is delayed, as by talking to the hand, as when the Holism becomes more interested in synchronizing multilayered group aspects for availing significations than individual aspects for apprehending conscious feedback. Part of God's job description is to participate in the unfolding design of each shared light-cone of experience. Part of God's purpose is to avail individual perspectives with opportunities to learn and record how to react to changing, group-availed significations. Evolution proceeds along multilayered tracts when individuals with new and multilayered superiorities or traits for competition and/or cooperation are favored for reproducing. For individual based societies (republics), individual superiorities will be favored. For collectivist based societies (hives), group superiorities will be favored. Even so, for defining the fittest to survive and replicate, the following are ever entailed: Will (holistic, preset, active, perspectivistic), synchronization, consciousness, appreciation, and purposefulness --- via a dance of feedback between a perspective of the fluxing whole and perspectives among the variously signified and relating parts.
.

Of Quantitatively Causal and Qualitatively Moral Significations

.
Of Quantitatively Causal and Qualitatively Moral Significations:
.
People want to understand how they signify in their consciousness, bodies, manipulations of things and masses, and communications with other perspectives.  People want to learn what their dispositions are, how their dispositions are related, how their dispositions should be expressed, evaluated, adjusted, sacrificed, altered, highlighted, organized, preserved, celebrated. People want to understand whether and why their dispositions must or should change. People want to understand what is in it for them, when they or things change. People want to understand whether and how their consciousness of Identity or identities are in any way preserved, even after their bodies disintegrate. People want to understand whether such concerns can be proved, determined, and/or rationalized --- wilfully, logically, reasonably, empirically, objectively, quantitatively, subjectively, qualitatively, probably, randomly, intuitively, empathetically, receptively. People want to understand whether all chronological appearances ot things, relations, and events are predetermined, actively and wilfully determined, or subjected to random determination, by a Higher Synchronizing Agency, and whether, if such might be the case, we can --- in any meaningful, reliable, or rational way --- intuit, communicate, or feed back interests, emotives, and rationalized desires with such Agency.
.
In respect of such needs and questions, people find it interesting to consider how and in what contexts empirical based methods may avail or guide answers, how such answers may be adequate, inadequate, evolving, complete, incomplete, astonishing, and/or changing. People find it interesting to consider whether or when reasonable traditions or answers must or may best be sought or inculcated beyond empirical based methods, in methods of prayer, intuition, and meta-empathy.
.
People want to understand the Source of significations, appearances, associations, and "causes." People want to understand such rules (and the Source of such rules) for such significations as they may happen objectively to share within their shared light cone of measurable experience. People want to understand whether, why, when, and how: Some iterations of signified relations cannot occupy the same space-time locus; some iterations of relations can, by intensifying, occupy the same space-time locus; some iterations annihilate one another back to zero signification; some attract or repulse, weakly or strongly, randomly or definitely; some coordinate pulses synchronously, instantaneously, and at a distance; some appear to push, to pull, or to push or pull or borrow against zero space or future time.
.
A RATIONALIZATION OF OUR RELATION WITH A SYNCHRONIZER:
.
A Holism conserves, synchronizes, quantifies, and senses every particular pattern and relation it avails. Each seemingly separate pattern that constitutes a qualitative-quantitative in its relation to our conscious experiences and measurable relations is absorbed, subsumed, and translated to a synchronous symphony for the Holism, out of otherwise cacophonous chaos.
.
In the Holism’s digitally summing capacity, it iterates us. In its holistic capacity, it reconciles us. In its capacity as conductor-composer, it feeds back from us. All that we experience, qualitatively and quantitatively, depends on the Holism’s apprehensions, appreciations, and interests concerning the iterating, summing, and reconciling of translations of us.
.
With intuition, empathy, and qualitative insight that come of subjective, conscious experience, we may become receptive to glimpses to guide us regarding the quality of the Holisms’s interest in us. That guiding feedback can be conceptualized as a dance of Will. Such can be interpreted as the functioning Will of a multi-layered, reconciling, guiding Evolver. Out of otherwise chaos, such Evolver apprehends, appreciates, and conducts a symphony of the cosmos.
.
Insofar as retired Americans have time to devote, and so long as the Internet remains viable, there remains viable the hope that our Republic may a bit longer be salvaged for our progeny.
.

Thursday, April 19, 2012

Eternal Present

.
ETERNAL PRESENT: From our particular perspectives, the present for quantifiables appears to proceed from an original singularity towards a vast multitude of individual, swallowing black holes. However, from holistic perspective, may the present also appear to proceed, conservationally, back and forth, across and through, a single source black hole, a kind of empty yet full, zero yet infinite, nothingness, which, however, presents to our particular perspectives as if some meta character or property associated with it were actively sponsoring an outbound multitude of small black holes? May the smaller black holes abide simply as derivatives (illusory projections) of the one source black hole?
.
From holistic perspective, may the original singularity be exploding, digitally, back and forth, in continuous consecutivitity? So long as our consciousness is interpreted from our perspectives as accelerating “outbound,” and so long as the source singularity is quantitatively constant and continuously consecutive, how could we say, from our digitally-limited light-cones of experience, whether or not it continues, or whether or not each swallowing by each small black hole is recycled through the source-singular black hole? May each collapse into each small black hole entail or signify a simultaneously polarized explosion from the source-singularity? Are the small black holes and the source singularity really different things, or are they just different projections or iterations of the same sponsoring entity or Identity? Are the small black holes projections of a cave, from within the cave?
.
What lies “beyond” the cave? Is IT some Ephemeral Essence that applies holistic consciousness, in order to signify measurable appearances, in order to experience and communicate particular perspectives of: music versus noise, art versus chaos, and purposefulness versus anomie? May each individual perspective of consciousness be intimately connected with (spiritually empathetic to?) such holism, therewith to all others? May each seemingly particular perspective be an iteration of a single reconciling Identity of Spiritual Consciousness?
.
May the reconciling holism abide, superior to mortal logic, both within and outside mortal appearances of space-time, constituting a holism that is simultaneously the encompassment or sum of its particular parts and perspectives, but also a qualitative character that abides in addition to such sum, or more than such sum?
.
What, in “reason,” should we believe or doubt regarding the quality of such holism’s relationship with us? Can it thoroughly experience each and every particular perspective, without experiencing being entirely confined to each such perspective? How can this make sense to our particularly limited logic, reason, intuition, or moral devotion? I can meta-rationalize, but I don’t know, even though I have little choice but to intuit, believe, and orient to some kind of worldview. As a mortal largely confined to either-or logic, I intuit that one either believes or one does not (which is its own form of belief). When I refer to beliefs, I mean to include subconscious habits of behavior, of which one may not have abstracted to the level of consciously signified belief. Thus, I intuit one may act consistent with subconscious belief in a morally-reconciling holism or principle, even as one denies such prejudice or belief.
.
We each adjudge as best we can what are the moral loyalties and commitments of others. Few trust loyalties of those adjudged to be free of all loyalties beyond their shrunken selves. This is because there dwell Progs, Clown Libertines, Egghead Reductionists, Narcissists, and Sociopaths (i.e., know-it-all, quantify-it-all Rinos, Dinos, NWO).
.

Monday, April 16, 2012

REVERSING POINTS OF VIEW

.

REVERSING POINTS OF VIEW:
.
CAUSE AND EFFECT: Apart from pre-set associations and sequential significations, what “really” mediates cause and effect, to facilitate the choosing or determining of relational unfoldings of appearances and events? Are not Identities often quantitatively the same in existential essence, yet qualitatively differentiating in temporal translations and relations? How should things or events be identified or seen to flux or change, except as the Holism synchronizes to will and want? Is such not a marker of consciousness? What is being attracted, repelled, or spun, but the delusionary conceptualizations, appreciations, apprehensions, and pursuits of iterations of perspectives of a single identity of Consciousness — vying for signification and expression in respect of an holistic, receding, proceeding, flux of connected, conscious Will?
.
ASK: Insofar as mortals, by definition, cannot relate in order to measure against a quantitatively un-relatable standard (like a thing-in-itself), then ask:
.
ITERATIONS OF IDENTITY: Depending on how one defines our commonly quantifiable universe, is it preset to collapse (return to zero?) into a multitude of black holes? If so, is each black hole, in translatable respect, simply an iteration of every other black hole? Does each black hole signify an identity that is distinguishable only in apparent relations, but not in absolute respect? Is each collapse an iterative signification for a collapse of the whole?
.
ATTITUDE OF CONCEPTION: Can we as easily conceptualize our universe as if it is accelerating to a collapse or as if it is accelerating to an expansion? Is space-time expanding or contracting? Is there any absolute sense in which our universe can be said to be expanding or contracting? Or in which gravity can be said to be a repelling versus an attracting force? When space-time is conceptualized to be exploding from a singular point, must it not also be conceptualized as distorting? Must not not such distortion twist matter, energy, and mass out of so-called “empty” space-time? Are relative experiences or recordations of matter-energy (quantitative substance, or mass) derivative of distortions of space-time? Or are relative experiences of space-time derivative of distortions of matter-energy? If space-time distortions are conceptualized as causing mass, then gravity is signified as an attractive force. If mass is conceptualized as causing space-time distortions, then gravity is signified as a repellant force. Regardless of conceptualization, gravity will be experienced consistent with formulas of general relativity. Does local variance in mass "cause" distortions in the space-time field, or do distortions in the space-time field cause mass? Is mass a causal agent, or is it only a signifier that is communicated or associated with a synchronizing causal agent, which is of a meta-quality that is beyond measure or control, but not beyond appreciation and prayer?
.
MEASURING BY CONSERVING ZERO: Conservation preserves quantitative tradeoffs in calculations for relative experiences of matter and energy. But can matter and energy be considered as a substantive unity, as matter-energy? If so, can such matter-energy holistically flux in ways that cannot be locally quantified, as by expanding, stretching, twisting, distorting and fluxing space, time, or space-time? May immeasurably qualitative fluxes of a holism, like an Ephemeral Essence, account for relatively quantifiable distortions and interfunctionings of space-time and matter-energy?
.
POINT OF VIEW: Which way on a mobius twist, or a staircase of circling and connecting patterns and strings, is up, and which way is down? There is a popular picture which can be conceptualized, depending on perspective and habit, as depicting either an old woman with an ugly nose or a rabbit. Except insofar as one may be disposed to consider such depiction as the “picture” of a rabbit-witch, it is not really, in itself, a picture of either. Likewise, it may be considered that gravity is not really either a pushing or a pulling force. This suggests why a grand theory of physics cannot be unified: Because, in reality, every concept of quantitative physics is necessarily derivative of a concept of qualitative consciousness.
.
UNIFICATION OF STAGE: The Standard Model, as a way of expecting, in order to completely reduce the qualitative to the quantitative, cannot succeed. To succeed, it would have to incorporate gravity as either a purely attractive force for mass, or a purely repellant force. That cannot be done, for gravity and mass are not things in themselves. They are byproduct-significations of a synchronizing, Ephemeral Essence, which fluxes in digital-like back-and-forth, give and take, attraction and repulsion ... for changing and exploring communications of order pulled from chaos, music pulled from noise, beauty pulled from disgust, awe pulled from anomie, the qualitative pulled from the quantitative, and freedom pulled from empathy. For that, the physical world is a constructed stage, not a thing that can be measured in itself.
.

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Corporatist Resistance is Futile (?)

.
The Left doesn't deal in practical reality.  It deals in abstract feelings and jealousies.  So, corporate opportunists have become very proficient in taking every culture apart, simply by dishing in abstract resentments.  Any unified culture or people can be thus divided into innumerable, overlapping "minorities," therewith to sow and reap resentments. Under what concepts can a conniving corporatist put flesh on abstract resentments, thereby to destroy every nation?  Well, resentments can be artificially nurtured and exploited among all human classifications, including the following:  Ethnic origin, race, gender, age, kind of education and conditioning, sexual orientation, dependency orientation, fashion wannabe orientation, criminal background, empathetic worldview versus habit of gangster backed selfishness, and spiritual code of mores.
.
By marking abstract classes and nurturing resentments, thugs can so divide a society as to fool it into believing its various divisions are represented, even though, had the society considered its interests as a holism, it would never elect such beasts.  This is how international crony advertising and corporatism works.  The two-party system is powerless to defend against such corporatism.  The natural inclination of morally unguided corporatism is to crush and cannibalize every nation, even nations built on traditions for respecting its citizens' freedom and dignity.
.
Corporatism inclines to replace intuited, common-sense notions of higher purposefulness with "science."  Sam Harris seems to want elites to quantify and allocate morality under a "scientific" metric of "well being."  Of course, non-scientifically trained members of the masses must delegate responsibility and control for making such measures and allocations to properly trained, scientific eiltes.  No doubt, these elites will have only our best interests at heart.  Lol/sarc.  What would such "moral scientists" make of Barry and Michelle's example for partying down on the money of the American people? What would they make of the message imparted to the Secret Service?
.
America's founders had foresight to check and balance against a multitude of evils.  However, they failed to provide any meaningful check against godless, international corporatism, which now owns and operates both of our main political parties.
.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Will Vampires

We're awash in useful idiots from both the Left and Right. The common goal of those who want to rule the Left and Right is to reap the work of the Middle Class. What's the essential commonality among useful idiots across the spectrum? Well, neither they nor their would-be masters apprehend any responsible or empathetic Will. In their conception og Reality, the following are non-existent delusions: Will, dignity, freedom, merit, responsibility, and decency. Left to themselves, they're pitiful. Not believing in Will, why suppose Will should retain interest in them? They become like automotons, set to respond to immediate gratifications, drugs, hormones, depravities, and mind-numbing distractions. They greatly need either to be taken care of, or to rule others to take care of them. No surprise that they respond to despotic voices that repeatedly tell they they're entitled!
.
What's the consequence? The reaping and destruction of the Middle Class, i.e., those who believe in initiative, work, merit, responsibility, and sustained discipline. Are despots and useful idiots right? Is it true that Will is a non-existent? Hardly. A qualitative, non-physical subjective that's beyond reduction to quantitative, physical measure is hardly evidenced, much less proved, by quantitative measures. The ridiculous argument from the "ghost in the body" is the argument of a tautologist who fancies himself smart. Will is experienced by living it, not by measuring it. Because it's not physical, it's not confined or coextensive with a particular, bodily expression of the wider field.
.
History's replete with exploitations of useful idiots, such as those who come to believe non-physical qualitatives can be disproved by physical quantitatives. Such people are easily reduced to the most selfish, animalistic, narcissistic, sociopathic, and nihilistic of drives. They're crony socialists and crony corporatists of both the Left and the Right, who're quickening in alignment to cannibalize the Middle Class. They're not really communists or socialists, for such systems don't really exist. Rather, they're destroyers of human freedom and diginty. They're destroyers of middle class pursuits of meaningfulness and happiness. Only very recently might the Middle Class be waking up.
.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

How a Decent Republic Can Survive

How can Republics defend themselves against alliances that spring from sociopathic (non-empathetic), narcissistic (self-empathetic?), or martyr (too empathetic) agitators who seek to excite mobs in order (cynically or stupidly) to harness them under elitist rule?
.
End political correctness that gets in the way of employers’ rewarding work, initiative, and talent. (Cut counterproductive governmental red tape.)
.
Check against mass alienation. (Don't allow dispersal of wealth to grow so lopsided that envy and hatred become unrestrained. Provide safety net for health care and social security, good enough to avail decency, not so gold plated as to disincentive work. Encourage jobs for building infrastructure and improving highway beautification.)
.
Don’t grease the way to allow agitators to hire cheap or foreign demonstrators or voters. (Require voter ID. Restrict the vote to citizens. Restrict the vote to informed, educated, invested, tax-paying citizens.)
.
End tenure and unions in public educational institutions.
Return public education to States and localities, especially with regard to the humanities.
Join with States to recruit scientific talent, by fostering big scientific research and technology in physics, space, and oceanic applications.
Encourage States to improve high school education, to teach marketable, employable skills.
.
Break up monopolies in media.
.
Check against foundations misusing tax incentives that fund false charities in order to advance crony corporatist governance. (Tax charities, but allow them to deduct monies and counseling services and costs for physical and mental health that are actually distributed, with checks against political grandstanding.)
.
Check against rise of aristocrats, oligarchs, and inherited wealth. (Progressively tax inheritances. Tax wealth indirectly by progressively taxing consumption. Don’t tax domestic income. Apply a progressive tax system against consumption, and direct proceeds to finance building and maintaining infrastructure and public art and beautification.)
.
Check against foreign interests that seek to undermine and cannibalize America. (Don’t tax foreign in-flows. Do tax foreign out-goes.)
Check against international corporations being used to empower foreign interests that seek to undermine and cannibalize America.
Check against foreign nations’ corrupting domestic politicians for harnessing Americans to free trade, while they engage in currency manipulation.
.
Do not needlessly discourage friendly relations with philosophies and religions that inspire good faith, good will, and empathy for effort.
Honor the family.
Encourage philosophies that inspire idealizations based on spiritual good will and empathy.
.
Encourage friendships with other nations that facilitate human freedom and dignity.
Encourage global efforts towards population management.
.
Preserve military strength against despotic and collectivist regimes that want to rule over and wipe out middle class expressions of human freedom and dignity.

Friday, April 6, 2012

The Word

.
The Word: In the beginning was the Word (concept of Conceptualizer). And the Word became flesh (took on particular aspects of mortality within an immaterial whole). In a word, physical "things" are only of The Word. In that sense, The Word (the relational map) Is The Territory. However, what we take to be "Physical Territory" is only dependent territory, i.e., dependent upon sharing and feeding back with common and particular perspectives of Consciousness.
.
Physical relations do not, in themselves (apart from relations), physically exist. They relate to no "thing" except other relations. Yet, no other relation with which they relate exists as a physical thing-in-itself. To what "thing," then, do relations relate? Answer: Not to a physical thing, but to an immaterial, non-quantitative, QUALITITIVE THING, i.e., Consciousness (a quantitatively inexplicable, one-of-a-kind, meta "thing," which our experience or intuition from life suggests to have capacity to apprehend and appreciate experiences of relationships among and between "particular relations," more encompassing relations, and the unifying Source of all relations, i.e., the Holism In Itself).
.
Word communicates transmittable relationships. Apart from quantifiable measurability in relationships, there is no physical thing whose existentiality abides as a thing in itself. Every "physical thing" is merely a placeholding signifier of measurable expressions and relationships among forms, spinning within forms, being fluxed and expressed among perspectives of Consciousness.  That is, every physical thing is but a conceptualization (a word) being communicated from and within the Mind of God.
.
**************
.
David Garner: "It is interesting that we are aware of an objective reality, but there is no way to understand it objectively."
.
INDEED! Must there not abide an objective reality which, in itself, is beyond measure, i.e., an Ephemeral Essence? Must it not retain a one-of-a-kind capacity, which a mere particular form or perspective could neither have nor bend to mortal logic? After all, a perspective, while binding its subjective consciousness to a limiting form or particular body, would have no objective basis for comparing the subjective quality of its experience to the subjective quality of any other perspective's experience. (Would this be a hybrid aspect of the measurement problem and the uncertainty principle?) Well then, if a particular perspective cannot adjudge objective comparisons with other particular perspectives, might a holistically encompassing perspective (an Ephemeral Essence?) retain such capacity? I think yes.
CONSIDER CONSCIOUSNESS. In common sense, is not the mark of consciousness the capacity to apprehend what otherwise would abide as mathematical iterations of neutrals, in order then to communicate and charge choices and condemnations, likes and dislikes, appreciations and apprehensions, attractions and repulsions? If the Ephemeral Essence is the ongoing Source of flux that directs and guides the unfolding of our conscious communications, must it not, in an intuitive way of thinking, itself be COMMUNICATIVE (and thus conscious)? In common parlance, may it reasonably be conceptualized that the Ephemeral Essence exhibits a qualitative property of consciousness that is superior to measurable physics?
.
PROMETHEUS UNBOUND OR FRANKENSTEIN UNBOUND (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prometheus_Unbound_(Shelley)): I cannot objectively understand myself so long as my subjectively conscious identity remains bound to my particular body. Once unbound from my body, I would be absorbed into the one Field. Returned to the Field, might "I," from that perspective, objectively understand the parts? However, even from that perspective, I doubt I could objectively understand myself, as the Field-In-Itself. Of the nature or character of the Field, whether from particular or holistic perspective, it seems I may not infer more than: I am that I am.
.
RELATIONAL CONSTANTS: Meanwhile, the relationships we mortals measure in respect of "relative constants" seem to be byproducts of fluxing expressions of a qualitatively immeasurable, yet reconciling, ephemeral essence (cosmological constant?). In communicating such fluxing expressions of itself, such Ephemeral Essence, in respect of common-sense notions of consciousness, would be expressing an innate capacity of consciousness, superior to objective, quantifiable, measurably relational aspects of "physical reality." A common sense way to relate to such a conception is to consider the Ephemeral Essence itself as being (or being inextricably linked to) consciousness --- i.e., consciousness of a quality that is superior to the byproducts it expresses, not merely derivative of physical significations to which it, by its fluxes of apprehensions and appreciations, gives and guides expression.
.
HOLOGRAPHIC ITERATIONS: Consider a potentially simple yet elegant explanation for complexity: May each holistically synchronized flux and choice abide as only one choice, holographically iterated among a potential infinity of translatable expressions of the same choice?
.
OBJECTIVELY, WHAT IS "OUT THERE?" Well, I doubt there is any "physically measurable thing in itself" that is out there. What is out there are measurable relations. So how is it that one is able to relate to a subjective perspective from which to measure and relate to other relations? Whatever is the Source-Iteration is immeasurably, qualitatively ephemeral. But HOW is it able to avail us with relational experiences? If I cannot know the meta-howness of it, can I at least adduce from whence the physical trail of it arose and to whence it may lead? Can I adduce how it is that our capacity for leveraging technological skills seems to be guided yet unbounded? Physicists conceptualize about light cones. I wonder whether such light cones may be byproducts of unfolding feedback among holistic and particular perspectives? May that help conceptualize how it is that our technological capacities seem to be defined yet unbounded? The more we tinker with our capacities to relate to this and that relation, the further our opporunities unfold before us.
.
THE OLD ONE: Einstein wanted to believe "The Old One" was an objectivist, not a trickster. Well, I think the Old One is a trickster --- but not an innately evil one. Just one pursuing meaningfulness via a feedback relationship with particularizing perspectives of itself. Part of the pursuit of meaningfulness seems to abide in finding ways to lose ourselves, to divert our attention to search for what is or may be out there (or guided to appear to be out there). This seems to be descriptive of what the Obama Regime is doing, but in a way that's selfish to particular perspectives. The Regime has acquired near monopolistic control over institutions of media, banking, and governance. Thus, it has amassed overpowering ability to deploy every kind of visual, audio, and glandular stimulus against those it means to rule. It can blot away mass memory of broken promises, simply by treating us like dogs, constantly giving us new frisbees to chase. The Old One may not be engaged in trickstering meant to be evil, but particular perspectives often are.
.
 

Thursday, April 5, 2012

Digital Dancing --- Creation of Meaning

Google “Creating Meaning: Adobe Digital Marketing Summit Recap”.
.
A (trinitarian?) analogy between the Web, the Field, and the Source may be apt: that there abides an unfolding, feedback relationship between each perspective of consciousness and the Web (Source field). What you choose to “like” or click (apprehend and appreciate) affects that which the Web will advertise to you. (Yes, Google is preset by algorithmic programmers, but what meta algorithmic Programmer sets and responds to them?)
.
I suspect that which observers at large choose generally to observe tends to synchronize and define that which the Field will present to them. It’s not that the Field (God?) is either weak or corrupt, but that it’s in a digital feedback relationship with us, to guide its (and our) unfolding pursuits. That which is presented to us tends to synchronize and assimilate into fluxing cultures.
.
Ultimately, whether that which establishes and defines a culture will sustain it against unfolding, competing cultures will depend not on innate superiority or quantitative “fitness” of one or the other among competitors, but on an immeasurable quality of assimilated will of a culture and its feedback relationship with the Field. (Insofar as "fitness" is more a hindsight label than than a predictor of evolutionary success, it lacks, as a concept, scientific "rigor.")
.
Members of a culture may inspire more sustainability for their assimilation as they more insightfully appreciate their feedback dependence upon the Field (which abides beyond any mere quantitative sum of the environment). By more insightfully respecting the Source Web and its capacity for affecting the synchronizing quality of our relationship with it, we may establish and preserve a culture for pursuing meaningfulness (including merit, free will, responsibility, and decent empathy — all the qualities the pure quantitavists so willfully presume “not really to exist”).
.
The intelligence and meaningfulness that’s stored in sacred works is not in "either-or logic" for quantitative literalism, but in qualitative capacity to evoke music and empathy over noise and meaninglessness. When it comes to apprehending a need to shake the quantitatively literalistic beliefs about morality that are held both by believers in religion and by believers in science, I accord. However, I think Sam Harris is daft when it comes to a notion for scientifically quantifying tests for “well being,” in order to replace intuition-based morality with exclusive theories of science-based mirror neurons.
.
**********
.
Particular causation is no less strange a concept than existence. To try to catalogue each and every kind of so-called "objective cause" is no less impossible than Bertrand Russell's chasing the rabbit down the hole of trying to adduce a complete theory of mathematics. Yes, one can focus perspective down to the level of the near tautological and thus demonstrate such notions as 3 follows 2 follows 1, or certain chemical or orbital forms follow forms follow forms. When you finely control the context of a mixing process and catalyst, you can tend to finely predict a sequential result. Were that not so, we could not signify or communicate any particular perspective of meaningfulness at all. That said, we do not abide in a beaker, but in a fluxing, expanding cosmos, the synchronizing whole of which is continuously and constantly phase-shifting in ways that, however seemingly minute, render the beaker-mixed result of today not quite or qualitatively the same as the result of a billion years from now (which, measured against eternity, is not a speck). Insofar as we conceptualize regarding any particular, meaningful experience of the here and now (the eternal present), that's only in respect of a digital, back and forth relation between particular perspectives and more encompassing or even holistic perspectives of a quality of Consciousness. We are not given to signify any particulars, except insofar as we share in a light cone of experience that is availed by a synchronizing, fluxing, unfolding, guiding Source of the Cosmos.
.

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Postmodern and Posthuman Divorcing of God and God's Nature

.
With an android Pulse App, it’s convenient to monitor a variety of opinion-shaping commentators. Once one becomes generally familiar with worldviews espoused among the commentariat, one is usually, easily able to predict how its members will tilt in respect to unfolding events. Mainly, there are the worldviews of the Good (freedom conservers), the Bad (sheep-shearing Marxists), the Ugly (freedom-killing jihadists), and the pants-on-ground Clownish (libertine entitlement-arians). How may/should one gauge their truthiness? Well, ask: does experience suggest that their world views actually tend to establish and preserve that which they seem to wish for? Does printing and spreading money establish wealthy society? Does demoting freedom to non-reality establish goodliness or godliness? Does tolerating and financing with tax money every conceivable social combination assimilate defensible culture?

.
Mortals only tinker at mapping the non-trivial truth. Our models for the truth are not the actual territory of the truth. And no single, grand model seems to serve every legitimate scientific and spiritual purpose for how we relate to the truth. Rather, the present truth value for a particular model seems much to depend upon present purpose, perspective, and context. A political model that does not experientially seem to establish or preserve that which one feels or wishes for would seem not to have much truth value in relation to one's purposes.

.
Sometimes, postmodernists seem to grow dispirited and wish to divorce themselves in order to establish their own personal reality, as by “reasoning to wished results” — never mind God and God’s Nature. Imagination can be a wonderful attribute, but tends to nurture horrifics when it fails to apprehend its limits. We are, after all, limited to a sort of unfolding light cone of possibilities, as established and projected under God’s imagination. To paraphrase Dirty Harry, A man’s got to know his limitations ... and his purposes. Otherwise, he won’t have much to clue him whether his methods and opinions are helpful to his purposes. Sadly, with regard to the Bad, the Ugly, and the Clownish, that seems to be where we find ourselves. Such people seem not well to apprehend that which they are about.  Sadly, as they purpose to hollow out, replace, or render humanity superfluous to the cosmos, that purpose does not appear to be beyond their capabilities.  Nor does such purpose appear to be one that Obama is disposed to hinder, especially vis a vis Israel and Iran.
.

Monday, April 2, 2012

Existential Hunger Games

.
For what entertainment is each short incarnation of self awareness volunteered to hunger to compete to express itself? An answer: The inescapable appreciation of synchronizing feedback that fluxes and relates to a myriad potential in degrees of freedom availed in particular ephemeral foldings of directionally limiting cones and fields of space-time.
.
From A.T. --- Re: "Big Brother cannot control: the faith that God is even bigger and is watching over everything"
.
MECHANICS: Well, mechanically minded people tend to assume everything is reducible to the quantitative. To them, Intuition of an existent is something that must necessarily be provable, empirically. Or, if it cannot be tested empirically, then they pronounce it meaningless (as if music and poetry were necessarily meaningless, unless what makes them music or poetry could be mathematically delimited). In essence, these people assume there's no such an existent as a non-quantitative qualitative, and then claim to have proved it because (lol!) it cannot be quantified!
.
INTUITION: For mechanically minded people, Intuition of a kind that cannot be empirically tested is generally considered to be meaningless. However, if there does abide such an existent as a non-quantifiable qualitative, then would not the only way reasonably to hypothesize about and test it be with a kind of inutition that cannot be empirically tested, i.e., an intuition for the purely qualitative? Would not the only possible, reasonable "test" for intuiton of a pure qualitative consist in the test availed in life? Would not such intuition consider whether accepting it makes generally useful sense for the purpose of explicating, establishing, and preserving civilization that broadly facilitates human expressiveness? For human civilization, what other test could there be, concerning issues of moral qualitatives? Direct, internal, subjective experience of a here-and-now connection with a qualitative existent, by definition, could not be tested quantitatively, but only in qualitative experience, i.e., life. To assume a non-quantitative qualitative cannot meaningfully be tested except quantitatively is to confuse assumption with evidence and proof, as if one could prove an assumption merely by assuming it.
.
TEST: Suppose a mechanically minded atheist were to convince everyone to be "bright" enough to accept a purely mechanical, quantitative, non-qualitative view of life and beingness. In the name of what science or hubris should such a one presume therewith to inspire the establishment or sustenance of any desirable civilization?
.
HUMAN DIGNITY: In good will, what does the core of one's consciousness suggest, with regard to a qualitatively connecting Source of consciously empathetic appreciation? To each mind of good faith, how often will such intuition redound in much the same way? Why might that be? Alternatively, if one doesn't believe such, how should one expect with mere empiricism to inspire people to progress or evolve to produce or preserve decent civilization?
.
PYRAMIDS OF ABSTRACTIONS: Suppose one abstracted further, and told people they have only been selected by the unfolding of Nature to believe in something that "does not really exist," merely because such a Trick-Of-Belief-Based-On-Self-Deceit can enhance advantages for survival and reproduction? Well then, does that itself not beg a question: Isn't that trick of belief itself a qualitative, and isn't faith in its value for natural selection based more on a preferred qualitative mode of assuming, than on empirical, quantitative proof? Why suppose Nature, if nothing more than dumb quantitative chance, would seem to favor building ever more abstract levels of self deceit on top of levels of self deceit? How many species find evolutionary value in tricks of self deceit, if that's all they are? Why presume a purely quantitative Nature does (or should?) favor tricks of self deceit for purposes of natural selection --- unless there's some innate, qualitative, fundamentally conscious Aspect of feedback that so avails Nature? Yes, Nature avails a panopoly of competitive trickery, even to the point of favoring pyramids upon pyramids of self deceit. But how could Nature do so, if it is purely unconscious, dumb, and quantitative, and devoid of any non-quantifiable qualitative? Indeed, how could the originating Singularity have occurred, if devoid of a non-quantifiable, qualitative connector?
.
BOTTOM LINE: Intuition may lead one to alternate in faith that Nature is guided by a connecting, holistic consciousness, versus faith that Nature is guided by nothing more than an inexplicably directional, originating energy, which itself is connecting, yet dumb. Either path is based fundamentally in faith. However, given reasonable modifications, one seems more suitable to present context for availing a longer sustainable and more decent civilization.
.
REALITY V. MODEL OF REALITY:  If purely quantitative “reasoning” (apart from conscious, living intuition of the qualitative) should be our only and trumping guide, ask: What “reason” should explicate why there is or should be evolution for facilitating any conscious self, merely to deceive same self? For what purely quantitative reason should consciousness “just happen” initially to be set up to compete in giving expression to various forms in order to advantage self deceit within any species? To say such “just happens” is merely to assume the only or dominant explanation is competition among forms of purely unguided happenstance. Does a hindsight-rationalization that stuff “just happens” really prove anything? Can such an assumption account for all that can or should be accounted for among mortal perspectives of consciousness, for all proper purposes and all perspectives and contexts? Does trumping-reason necessitate that we should accept that inanimate and meaningless substance is the superior and only reality, and that our propensities to imagine otherwise with regard to qualitative existents (such as conscious will) are mere inferior delusions of self? Depending upon purpose, contextual frame, and point of view, cannot an equally viable philosophy or model of reality be just as well conceptualized (and with no practical impediment to science) by modeling conscious will as the superior trump and substance as the inferior delusion? Is that not at least equally suggested by intuition, math, life, and philosophy? Should not one orient one’s belief model, depending upon effectiveness to legitimate purpose at hand?  After all, no mere model or concept will ever exactly constitute the territory of reality it is intended to map.
.

Of Women, Intuition, and Moral Reason

.
Of Women, Intuition, and Moral Reason:
.
American women, tending to be more and longer sheltered, more often reason with feelings over facts. In that respect, they tend to be more manipulable by skilled demagogues, practiced in promising to spin riches out of nothing but fantasies. Who else has our wealthy society too long sheltered from reality? Keynesians, fiat money printers, dopers, family haters, felons, illegals, victim mongers, race baiters, mobsters, miracle promisers and their prey. Traditional American producers are no longer in the majority. Indeed, the majority tend to think traditional American men are no longer needed, now that they are convinced that wealth can be established and preserved out of nothing more than wishing it so. It will take more than one generation to wash this nonsense out of the pipeline. Simply put, you can't convince practiced fantasists with arguments based on facts. The school of reality will have to impose a time of hard knocks in order to wash away the accumulation of delusions. Unfortunately, that school will also wash away and replace many of the fondest memories of the moral potential and "ought" of America.
.
With respect to moral potential, "Ought" can only be derived from "Is" in respect that "Is" includes not just the quantitative, but also the qualitative. Even then, Ought will not be derivable as a measurable quantitative. Rather, Ought is derivable qualitatively, not with quantitative experience, but with qualitative Intuition of a kind that appreciates not just the appetities that are whetted by hormones within glands and brains, but also the meta appetites for experiencing meaningful purposefulness, with which feedback of meta apprehensions the universe responds and dances.
.
One does not empirically or quantitatively demonstrate the Intuition of which I write. Rather, one lives it. One does not quantitatively prove one's I-ness, consciousness of identity, self awareness, or free will. Nor does one prove the existence of other beings and perspectives of such I-ness. Rather, one qualitatively and holistically senses, experiences, and lives one's I-ness. One does not measurably prove fellow perspectives of I-ness. For all one knows empirically, such other perspectives may be solipsistic tricks or fluxing presentations of a singular consciousness. They may be nothing more than iterations of a same unconscious, highly advanced, biologically-based, holographic projection or machine, coordinated to dance to meta dreaming of a single puppet master. Empirically, a mortal being cannot prove otherwise. However, based on insight derivative of common sense experience, one can reasonably, qualitatively, intuit otherwise. One can Intuit that other beings and perspectives are conscious and do experience merit and appreciate free will and meaningful purposefulness. One Intuits such based on experience of a quality of I-ness, not based on mere empirical measures of unconscious substance. One does not weigh I-ness; one experiences and intuits it.  Based on living experience, one can reasonably, qualitatively, empathetically, intuitively believe in conscious moral purposefulness --- not empirically prove it.
.
INTUITION:  Mechanically minded people tend to assume everything is reducible to the quantitative.  To them, Intuition of an existent is something that must necessarily be provable, empirically.  Or, if it cannot be tested empirically, then they pronounce it meaningless (as if music and poetry were necessarily meaningless unless what makes them music or poetry could be mathematically delimited).  In essence, these people assume there is no such an existent as a non-quantitative qualitative, and then claim to have proved it because (lol!) it cannot be quantified!  For mechanically minded people, Intuition of a kind that cannot be empirically tested is generally considered to be meaningless.  However, if there does abide such an existent as a non-quantifiable qualitative, then would not the only way reasonably to hypothesize about it and test it be with a kind of inutition that cannot be empirically tested, i.e., an intuition for the purely qualitative?  Would not the only possible and reasonable "test" for an intuiton of a pure qualitative consist in the test availed in social life?  Would not such intuition consider whether accepting it makes generally reasonable and useful sense for the purpose of explicating, establishing, and preserving a decent, moral civilization that broadly facilitates human expressiveness?  After all, what other test could there be, concerning issues of moral qualitatives?  Direct, internal, subjective experience of a here and now connection with a qualitative existent, by definition, could not be tested quantitatively, but only in qualitative experience.  To assume a non-quantitative qualitative cannot meaningfully be tested except quantitatively is to confuse assumption with evidence and proof, as if one could prove an assumption merely by assuming it.  TEST:  In good faith and good will, what does the core of one's consciousness suggest to one, with regard to a qualitatively connecting Source of consciously empathetic appreciation?  To each mind of good faith and good will, how often will such intuition redound in much the same way?  Why might that be?  Alternatively, if you don't believe such, how do you expect with mere empiricism to inspire people to progress or evolve to produce or preserve a decent civilization?  Suppose you abstract further, and tell people they have been selected by the unfolding of Nature to believe in something that does "not really exist" merely because such a trick of belief can enhance advantages for survival and reproduction?  Well, then, does that itself not beg a question:  Isn't that trick of belief itself a qualitative, and isn't your faith in its value for natural selection based more on a preferred mode of assuming, than on empirical proof?  After all, how many species find evolutionary value in such a trick, if that's all it is?  In other words, why presume a purely quantitative Nature does (or should?) favor such a trick for purposes of natural selection, unless there's some innate, qualitative Aspect that so avails Nature?  Moreover, suppose you convinced everyone to be "bright" enough to accept your view of life and beingness.  In the name of what science or hubris do you presume therewith to inspire the establishment or sustenance of any desireable civilization?
.